There is no core point. You claim bias when actually it’s one bloke whose asked an audience question 3 times in the programmes history.
The panel should be marginally in favour of leaving the EU over a period of time - it isn’t
The notion this programme has since 2016 tried to adopt a UKIP agenda is hilarious
Why did you make a false claim you had to dribble and backtrack on out of interest?
My claim was that UKIP councillors have been featured in the audience several times. I have shown this to be true and admitted that it was one guy 4 times and another guy twice rather than several individuals. My core point is correct - that UKIP councillors have been prominently featured members of the audience.
I didn’t claim the program is adopting a UKIP agenda or mention the weighting of the panel.
You are desperately focusing on semantics because my core point is correct.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Lol. Adding the individual % swings to get a total % swing.
What does he do?
You must know as you say there they are impartial - that’s a big claim
If it was me I’d do a hell of of a lot of research as of know their background would be scrutinised
It took me 2 seconds on LinkedIn so can you share the research?
You’ve made an argument on a comprehensive, Government paper based off the back of a 2 second LinkedIn search?
Pick out something in the paper what you don’t agree with, and have evidence to the contrary and then we can discuss it in good faith.
It’s all a bit tin foil hat and it doesn’t seem to be convincing anyone else but possibly Mucca who I suspect went to the same school of dumbed down education as you
There is no core point at all - to put it kindly you got a bit excited and then realised you’d embarrassed yourself on a public forum with a plethora of hyperbole
I then quote some research that backs Evo 100% and you throw out some tiresome right wing bias (which is odd as whenever left wing bias is accused there is a storm of protest) and then that’s a conspiracy as well
It’s all a bit tin foil hat and it doesn’t seem to be convincing anyone else but possibly Mucca who I suspect went to the same school of dumbed down education as you
This made me laugh.
The same University taught me to refute arguments based off quick 2 second LinkedIn searches.
Perhaps we’re more alike than you think?
No you said he was impartial
Justify or retract
Question Time audience is full of UKIP candidates who are given a chance to speak and then shared by their social media teams.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes. Several times UKIP councillors have managed to get a question from the audience
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Core point number one if “full of UKIP candidates”
No proof
Well three times
It’s a Government paper, not an opinion piece in a newspaper.
Gov.uk isn’t known for peddling propaganda.
Well it seems those two seconds are two seconds more than you’ve actually done to prove this is impartial - which was kind of my point
What does he do?
You must know as you say there they are impartial - that’s a big claim
If it was me I’d do a hell of of a lot of research as of know their background would be scrutinised
It took me 2 seconds on LinkedIn so can you share the research?
No they just spend £9 million of taxpayers money on scare tactics and send them to every household in the country
If you’d opened the report, you’d find it was from 2013. Before the referendum was even announced or even Government policy. This is an analysis of the economic impact of our EU membership back up by empirical evidence. Disagree? Fine, let’s discuss it.
The findings were impartial in the context that the debate on our membership of the EU hadn’t really been formalised so there wasn’t really a political angle to it.
If you were that detailed, you’d have spotted that right away. Instead of looking on LinkedIn, maybe give the report a read.
It was you who said the authors were impartial - at that point I got bored as it’s obvious this is not the case. Politicians have been dribbling in the Euro gravy train for decades so the notion this report is “empirical evidence” is somewhat laughable. The blood stained Blair creature (know him? Loves the EU) has empirical evidence there was weapons of mass destruction when actually there were no such thing.
Bet you used this in your essay didn’t you?
Most people I know, friends and family, are traditionally Labour people. Many voted UKIP 5 years ago in the Euros - and a few also in the GE that followed the refferendum.So the repeating story so far seems to be that The Brexit Party are only really taking MEP’s of UKIP, the Lib Dem’s and Greens seem to be the ones taking MEP’s of the Conservatives and Labour and when you lump the parties with a clear remain policy together their votes outnumber those of parties with a clear hard brexit policy.
There’s no appetite for a hard brexit in this country.
Most people I know, friends and family, are traditionally Labour people. Many voted UKIP 5 years ago in the Euros - and a few also in the GE that followed the refferendum.
Speaking to all of them, other two that live down London, they all voted for the Brexit party on Thursday - but wouldn't waste a vote for them in a GE, seeing how much of the vote they once had but only delivered one MP.
Unheard of before, they WOULD vote blue if they Tory's guaranteed delivering Brexit.
I honestly think that if the Labs follow the Libs policy, they will lose out big style.
The turnout in the West Midlands was even worse than in the country as a whole, 31.1% compared to 33.3% in 2014.
I don't yet have figures for Coventry but the above broadly coincides with what I witnessed personally.
Most people I know, friends and family, are traditionally Labour people. Many voted UKIP 5 years ago in the Euros - and a few also in the GE that followed the refferendum.
Speaking to all of them, other two that live down London, they all voted for the Brexit party on Thursday - but wouldn't waste a vote for them in a GE, seeing how much of the vote they once had but only delivered one MP.
Unheard of before, they WOULD vote blue if they Tory's guaranteed delivering Brexit.
I honestly think that if the Labs follow the Libs policy, they will lose out big style.
Mart don't forget remainers actually got out to vote and leave voters didn't, as remainers are the people with a point to prove.
So it doesn't even remotely tell a story of what people want
Bollocks! Angry people vote. Brexit parties got 5 more seats than 2014, remain got 20 more than 2014. Remain are angrier. Most people don’t want the snake oil salesman and charlatan as leader.
Tony, the national front in France are anti EU Pro European, what on earth are you jibbering
Honestly I've been told for 3 years us leavers are the thick uninformed ones
No the fact is turnout in leave voting areas was down.
That's not me making it up thats FACT
Bollocks! Angry people vote. Brexit parties got 5 more seats than 2014, remain got 20 more than 2014. Remain are angrier. Most people don’t want the snake oil salesman and charlatan as leader.
So remainers aren’t angry and are happy to leave - wow
Where do you come up with this dribble G?
For anyone debating whether Leave or Remain ‘won’ last night... it was a draw. We’ll see what happens from now from Lab and Con, but you’ll think their positions will become more polarised now too.
At a guess, you’d think we’re heading for a no deal or a second referendum now.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?